A residents group has sued the Hackensack Board of Education demanding that it correct an error in the wording of a ballot question slated to appear before voters next week, as tensions continue to mount ahead of the $170 million schools referendum.

The group claims the wording on the ballot could lead a voter to think that the potential tax impact would be thousands of dollars less than it would be if the financing is approved.

“We don’t know whether this is deliberate deception or gross incompetence by the Board of Education,” Martin Cramer, a trustee with the group, said in a statement. “We are not going to allow them to continue to spread false information that misleads taxpayers without a fight.”

Hackensack Smart Schools Inc. filed the suit Monday in Superior Court, alleging it is the second time that school district materials minimized the financial impact the measure would have on taxpayers. Meanwhile, board officials admitted that the ballot contains incorrect wording but said it is too late to correct the question.

“There was never any intention to mislead the residents and taxpayers of Hackensack about the tax impact associated with the costs of the referendum,” Rosemary Marks, the acting superintendent of schools for the district, said in an email. “The information available on our website and shared publicly at the Town Hall meetings consistently identify the tax impact cost as ‘per year.’ ”

The issue could be resolved by a judge in short order, the group said.

The referendum issue, which asks voters whether to approve nearly $170 million in financing to renovate aging schools, upgrade security and build a new junior high school, is estimated to cost the average taxpayer roughly $300 annually.

Based on the average assessed home, valued at an estimated $245,000 in Hackensack, the average taxpayer will foot an annual bill of about $309, school officials have said.

However, the local group says the language in the ballot question reads that the proposal will cost the average household "$308 over 30 years” — misleading voters to believe the proposal will cost the average taxpayer $10 annually by omitting the words “per year” from the phrase.

NEWSLETTERS

Get the Breaking News newsletter delivered to your inbox

We're sorry, but something went wrong

Get breaking news from all around North Jersey delivered to your inbox as soon as it happens.

The omission of the words “per year” translates to a roughly $9,000 mistake if it is misunderstood by the voter.

Marks said Monday that the district planned to distribute a city-wide mailing, to arrive in residents' mailboxes later this week, with the correct wording for the ballot question. She said the district had explored the potential of reprinting ballots, but were advised by counsel of “legal hurdles” that might arise because the referendum is next week.

District officials have presented the plan at various public meetings since June, and they have two more planned this week ahead of the special election on Jan. 22. Officials are hosting a "referendum fair" on Tuesday night, beginning at 7 p.m. at Hackensack High School, to answer residents' questions.

Hackensack High School(Photo11: NorthJersey.com File Photo)

This is not the first time that a person or group has come out against the $170 million referendum measure.

Last month, Mayor John Labrosse published an open letter questioning the need for a proposal so big, and asking that the vote be postponed until questions revolving around the district’s student population and other issues could be addressed. The entire City Council, with the exception of Councilman David Sims, raised its own issues with the referendum — including with the wording in the ballot question — at a meeting last week. Sims was absent from the meeting.

“It’s unfortunate that we have presented a plan that is meant to focus on educational needs and the facility needs of our district,” Marks said. “Our plan is being taken totally out of the context for which it was created — namely, to provide for the students of the district for today and into the future.”

Paul Swibinski, a spokesman for the residents group, said the incorrect wording on the ballot question is at least the third time the board and school officials have “intentionally” misrepresented the financial impact of the proposal. He referred to errors in informational flyers that were distributed to residents in months past.

“These continuous errors are part of a campaign to mislead voters,” said Swibinski, president of Vision Media Marketing Inc.

Too little, too late?

The core issue of the dispute is whether it is too late to correct the wording in the ballot question. The residents group is adamant that a change can be made if officials are legally compelled, but board and school officials say it is too late.

The complaint named the Hackensack Board of Education, but also the Bergen County clerk and Board of Elections.

Lara Rodriguez, the school board president, confirmed the absence of the words “per year” from the question when reached Monday by phone. She said the board explored correcting the error, but that it is too late to change the wording of the ballot question. To change the wording, the board would have had to go to court last Friday, she said.

"We did explore correcting the ballot question, because there was an omission of two words: 'per year,' " Rodriguez said. "It was not possible to get the ballots reprinted to have those two words included."

Paul Kaufman, the attorney who represents the Bergen County clerk, also said it is too late to reprint the ballots, when reached by phone on Monday afternoon.

“There are timing issues with the state,” Kaufman said.

However, the residents group alleges that the board was on track to correct the wording but backtracked because doing so might have meant a hefty expense. They pointed to an email exchange between legal counsel for the county and board: The legal counsel for the clerk's office said it was prepared to make changes but would be "indemnified" from any issues and costs that arise from a reprint. The exchange was included in the group's complaint.

The lawsuit, the group said, could compel the school board and county to change language in the ballot question to the correct wording. But because mail-in ballots have already been distributed, and hundreds already returned, the question can be changed only on voting machines that will be used.

“We are not asking for all of the sample ballots that were mailed to be reprinted ... just to have the machines corrected,” Swibinski said in an email. “If a Judge orders it ... the county Board of Elections can do this easily.”

Marks said she could not comment on the legal aspect of the matter or the conclusion drawn by legal counsel. John Gebbert, the school board’s attorney, said he had not yet seen the complaint in question when reached by phone on Monday afternoon.

The group Hackensack Smart Schools Inc. was formed last year by three trustees, including Cramer, who is an attorney. Cramer will be representing the group in court, according to the complaint.